News Hawthorn Racism Review - No player name speculation - opposition posters tread very carefully

[Strapping Young Lad]

Wrong. Hawks did what they had to do by the rules of the AFL.

Correct. For reference below, once the HFC had the report outlining serious allegations they were duty bound by the AFL’s protocol to hand over the report to the AFL integrity unit.

I will pin this post, as it seems to be a constant query.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

A democracy with a (relatively) free press?

The press used to take seriously its responsibility to give those they reported on a right of reply.

 

[Dipper]

We just have to wait for the other side of things to drip out; I'd be amazed if the basic facts of what is reported isn't true but what will be key will be the nuance. What that trio thought they were trying to achieve.

Over the years you get the impression that Clarkson particularly (although footy clubs in general) is guilty of an overreach where some sense of ownership of the young minds and bodies at his disposal is assumed.

It might not seem relevant but I remember a story where Grant Birchall

14

Grant Birchall

Age

36

Ht

193cm

Wt

89kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

21.9

5star

K

12.6

5star

HB

9.3

5star

M

5.8

5star

T

1.6

4star

MG

250.0

4star

D

13.3

3star

K

9.2

4star

HB

4.2

3star

M

4.3

4star

T

1.3

2star

MG

250.0

4star

D

14.0

4star

K

7.6

3star

HB

6.4

4star

M

2.6

3star

T

0.6

3star

was living alone so Clarkson bought him a dog, after a couple of days Birchall brought the dog back saying he didn't have the time or lifestyle for a dog. The story was told as an amusing out of the box thinking Clarko anecdote, whilst maybe he crossed lines it was because he loved his blokes.

But in reality what responsible, sensible 40 odd year old person buys a dog for somebody without a very clear idea that they want a dog. It's actually symptomatic of a warped sense of boundaries and what's acceptable and also a complete misread of the room because Birchall didn't want a dog.

I shouldn't need to say it, but just for the record my point is not to equate that action with the current allegations, but one can see that the mind that can project loneliness onto a player and come up with the solution of buying them a dog is possibly the same mind that can meddle in people's relationships to a completely unconsciable degree, driven by some deluded, messiah complex about saving people from themselves.



Sent from my SM-A326B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Glacier]

You forgot punishment, don't expect to walk away from this without any. You can no longer call yourselves family club any longer. Not after this.

Hey mate
We as supporters are all devastated here and sickened by all of this
But you coming in here taking potshots for whatever reason is pure crap
So kindly **** off
Mate

 

[Topiary]

Actually it's not hearsay. The individuals providing the evidence were literally in the room, which is the opposite of hearsay.

No justification, but be careful what you say because this might have been practices employed by your Club. Practices that were industry wide.

Regardless, it is repulsive behaviour with no justification on any level.

 

[Gralin]

The press used to take seriously its responsibility to give those they reported on a right of reply.

Hey Bruce time to **** off

 

[grumbleguts]

Must be a tough choice!

It was until your post. The geelong supporters in this thread have been all class. You, on the other hand...

 

[Brucie Buffer]

I am gob smacked, disgusted and ashamed if there is an element of truth in this.
The fact any human being was subject to this behavior is beyond belief in these times, let alone it being isolated to a particular race makes me sick to the stomach. Makes me want to cry that these people went through that over a career in footy.

 

[Hawk Hawkins]

The press used to take seriously its responsibility to give those they reported on a right of reply.

If and when any party does reply, I can assure you it will be front page news.

 

[kenneje]

Sad day to be a Hawthorn member with all this coming to light & putting us in the spotlight for the wrong reasons.

I do know first hand there was a player traded to St Kilda who was told at the time to ditch his girlfriend due to her family history.

I also know first hand a female ex employee (not indigenous) being told that she was a risk due to the fact that she would end up pregnant and to not sleep with any of the boys. Was justifiably outraged and quit shortly after these remarks were made.

Hadn't thought about it for years ...

 

[Gohawthorn13]

In the article one of the women actually talked about having emails and phone calls documented.

I’m not convinced of that but we will see.

 

[Hawk Hawkins]

I feel sick thinking about this. I’m sure that a lot of the subject matter discussed is also confronting for many others reading it.

Be kind with how you approach this as I’m sure this is stirring a lot of very strong emotions, regardless of your perspective.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Hey Bruce time to * off

Sorry? What have I done wrong here?

 

[Westcoast88]

Silencing someone on the issue of racism is not ok. Acknowledge that this situation can be trauma inducing for our first nation's people.

Westcoast88 it's terrible and if proven true then we as a club should be ashamed. This goes way beyond football. Thanks for speaking up

Thank you for your kind words. Sorry if I have been too confrontational. I never attacked Hawks over Kennet Rioli jeans thing, thought Kennet did not mean harm but this is too much for me. Sometimes the word racism is overused it's true but this one looks real bad. I will try to contain my emotions. Apologies.

 

[Gohawthorn13]

It’s not hearsay if it’s a conversation between the complainant and the accused. That’s admissible as evidence as an exception to the hearsay rule. The accused is entitled to put their version of events forward and (perhaps) seek to rebut the claim.

Standard of proof at tribunals is on the balance of probabilities (ie. more probable than not) as opposed to the higher criminal standard of beyond reasonable doubt.

In short, if the accused denies it, but his explanation is less believable than the accusation, it’s a good chance there’s an adverse finding and that could result in de-registration as a coach.

No because the defending party can say the conversation never happened.if it’s 1 individual vs 3 coaches/administrators. Which the baby situation is. Yes there’s 3 players in total but it’s the abortion issue is the whole case from what I’m led to believe. They need some very good evidence. At the very minimum they need emails or anything that can be traced back to them directly. Because if we start finding people guilty on hearsay and it is hearsay because at this point the conversation can’t be proven until the defendants acknowledge it or evidence proves it.

 

[Gohawthorn13]

If senior indigenous players on the team didn’t even know then how is anyone not involved meant it have any clue at the club.

 

[Gohawthorn13]

Let’s get one thing straight if it is proven true they’re done. But on the flip side if the player is proven to be lying he needs to be named and shamed and by proven to be lying I don’t mean inconclusive I mean proven.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Gotta agree with this.

What has happened here is incredibly serious. It possibly amounts to violations of the racial discrimination act, a federal crime. If true, and it does reach that level, those involved should not only be blacklisted from being anywhere near professional sport in the future, but could also (rightly) face criminal prosecution.

But to have allegations of this severity be made through a report that the accused were afforded no right of reply, and had no input into, and to then have it be laundered through the media, absolutely stinks.

Again, if its found to be true, get out the pitchforks. Until that time, I hope that the AFL investigation is truly impartial and comprehensive, so true justice can be achieved.

Just as an aside, this is possibly the fourth serious allegation of malpractice committed by an AFL club against its players in the last 10 years. Something truly stinky in AFL land, and hopefully this spurs some serious rethinking at AFL house at how they can prevent this sort of s**t happening in the first place.

Please stop posting that they had no right of reply or that the report was laundered through media. That's false.

The article was written by a very respected investigative reporter, who's been given first hand accounts by the people that he sought out to interview.

"ABC Sport put detailed questions about the allegations in this story to Clarkson, Fagan and Burt but at time of publication none had responded."

 

[Gohawthorn13]

Call me nuts but I always got that kind of vibe from Clarko during his time at the Hawks. Like having a boss who is way too interested in your personal life (I have lived that experience and it's not fun).

I've said it before on this forum but once again I am not sure the Kangas really did their due diligence in hiring Clarko.

Not so much his coaching ability (his record speaks for itself) but he seems to be someone who doesn't impose limits on himself (remember him going off at a junior umpire at an under 10 match?). And he seems to have gotten worse nd worse over the years based on what I have heard from Hodgey.

Fagan I am genuinely surprised at.

Other way round for mine if this is true clarko’s the surprising one because yes he’s got a temper but things of family he’s usually spot on. Where as fagan is more unknown for mine.

 

[Stottzy]

Why people are so impatient to wait and hear the full story before concluding is frightening. Clarko and Fagan weren't even interviewed, nor given a right to reply. It's literally nothing more than a kangaroo court so far.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

The press used to take seriously its responsibility to give those they reported on a right of reply.

All were given one and didn't utilise it.

 

[Gralin]

Why people are so impatient to wait and hear the full story before concluding is frightening. Clarko and Fagan weren't even interviewed, nor given a right to reply. It's literally nothing more than a kangaroo court so far.

How many times does it have to be pointed out that they were asked for a reply by the ABC prior to publishing the article and they chose not to

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Please stop posting that they had no right of reply or that the report was laundered through media. That's false.

The article was written by a very respected investigative reporter, who's been given first hand accounts by the people that he sought out to interview.

"ABC Sport put detailed questions about the allegations in this story to Clarkson, Fagan and Burt but at time of publication none had responded."

Fairly sure people aren't as critical of Jackson when he uncovers child abuse perpetrators.

Guarantee certain types would also froth at the mouth at anyone mentioned within cooee of the Epstein flight logs without pleading for calm and waiting for further evidence or due process taking place.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Why people are so impatient to wait and hear the full story before concluding is frightening. Clarko and Fagan weren't even interviewed, nor given a right to reply. It's literally nothing more than a kangaroo court so far.

Actually no, the Hawthorn investigation doesn’t profess to be a thorough, two-way investigation. Nor should it be. It’s a statement of allegations made when they proactively reached out to Indigenous former players.

 

[triangulation_squared]

I Lost a child myself 5 weeks ago. My employer has been exceptional. Even with the exceptional support it's taken a real effort to get our shit together again. I really can't get my head around the allegations I am reading.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

I Lost a child myself 5 weeks ago. My employer has been exceptional. Even with the exceptional support it's taken a real effort to get our s**t together again. I really can't get my head around the allegations I am reading.

Really sorry to hear that - take care of yourself.